Mirrorless Cameras – The Answer to our Woes?

If you’ve been following technology advances in camera equipment, I’m sure you’ve been hearing a lot of buzz about the new mirrorless cameras.

But are they really the answer?

The first mirrorless digital camera was introduced in 2004, but they’ve really only come into their own in the last couple of years. With the recent success of the Sony NEX, Olympus PEN and Fuji mirrorless lines, many photographers have been reversing their “bigger is better” mentality and embracing the size, weight, and design benefits that compact professional cameras have to offer.

Although the technology itself is quite new, the public hunger for lightweight but versatile equipment is anything but.

In essence, the mirrorless system is simply a digital version of the rangefinder camera which predates the popular SLR. The rangefinder was the style of the very first 35mm camera ever made – the Leica I, originally designed in 1913. In fact, the early days of film photography mirror (excuse the pun) the progression we are seeing now, one hundred years later, in the still-early days of digital.

Before the Leica, all that was available were either huge, boxy view cameras (you know, the kind with the accordion-looking lens and the black curtain) or the small but ultra-simple Brownie cameras that Kodak introduced around the turn of the century. Similarly, our generation has until now been limited to either the hefty DSLR or the miniature compact camera, with little choice in between aside from slightly smaller or larger versions of either.

But where there is demand, there is innovation, and in both eras the rangefinder was developed to bridge the gap. This style of camera took off in the 1920s and effectively defined most of the 20th century – a pattern we are seeing repeat with the new mirrorless trend.

The reasons for this are simple and many. The first and most obvious difference is right in the name: mirrorless. This refers to the mechanics inside the camera. On an SLR, there is a small mirror behind the lens that reflects the light up and through the viewfinder, allowing you to see your scene through the very lens you’ll be shooting it with. When a picture is taken, the mirror snaps up, exposing the image sensor behind it.

By removing this mirror, and all the parts required to move it, engineers are able to shrink the overall size of the camera by nearly 50%, simplifying the design and making it more lightweight, portable, steady, and discreet.

100 years ago this came with a big trade-off. Instead of using a through-the-lens viewfinder, you had to frame your shot in a little window in the top of the camera which may or may not include a mechanism to help you focus (this mechanism is where the term “rangefinder” comes from). The problem with this is that the perspectives seen from the lens and the viewfinder are not identical, so it was nearly impossible to frame your shot very precisely. The viewfinder was more of a rough estimate of how the picture would look.

With the advent of digital LCD screens, though, mirrorless cameras no longer have this limitation. And now, some mirrorless cameras come with an electronic viewfinder so you’re not even limited by the LCD screen. The image you see on the back of the camera or through the electronic viewfinder is actually being read off the image sensor itself, so you can focus and preview it exactly as it will be shot, with greater accuracy than even an SLR viewfinder.

With the rangefinder’s key drawback completely diminished, its benefits are free to take over. The compact size and weight make it easy to carry around, even with a few extra lenses and accessories. And because it has fewer moving parts it is much less susceptible to camera shake, making it perform better under low light without the need for a tripod.

Originally, the rangefinder style became popular among photojournalists (particularly war photographers) who were so active during the tumultuous early century. Their active lifestyle demanded equipment that was flexible, but also durable and easy to carry around. The same is true now of our increasingly mobile world, only this demand has expanded beyond professionals to everyday consumers.

But size isn’t everything. We’ve had small, compact digital cameras for a long time – even smaller than these. But they lack the control and image quality you get with mirrorless. Image sensors in point-and-shoot cameras are a fraction of the size found in mirrorless and SLR cameras, so they can never achieve the same image quality, even at high resolutions. Their lenses are fixed and usually not very good, they can’t be switched for specialty lenses when needed, and the manual exposure controls, if accessible at all, are not usually easy to use.

By contrast, mirrorless cameras have an ever-widening array of interchangeable lenses, including ones geared for low light, extreme distance, and unique effects. If the mirrorless systems have one flaw, it’s that there isn’t nearly as much choice in this area as there is in the SLR market. However, that is only a problem of the systems’ infancy, as more lenses and other accessories are being introduced all the time from a variety of manufacturers, including highly respected names such as Carl Zeiss, Voigtlander, and Leica (the very same brand that introduced that first rangefinder in 1913).

Today you can wield as much creative control with a mirrorless camera as you can with a DSLR, in a smaller package and at a smaller price.

The merits of mirrorless cameras are attracting more and more photographers, professional and consumer alike, and there’s little standing in the way of their market domination. Even if you’re not ready to relinquish your DSLR all together, you may find a mirrorless handy for those occasions when you don’t want to carry the weight of a DSLR. That’s how I got going with mirrorless, but since I’ve been using it I find I only take out my DSLR for special circumstances and I use my mirrorless almost exclusively.

If history is any indicator, mirrorless cameras are here to stay for the long haul, and will only continue to improve as time goes on.

Coming up soon on the blog, I’ll have a full review of the mirrorless camera I chose, the Sony NEX6. I’ll reveal why I chose it over other brands, and over the NEX7, and I’ll have lots of photos to show you the image quality possible with these little but powerful cameras.

I highly recommend it, I am delighted with mine and it makes a huge difference on the back. I just don’t like that feeling when I know if I don’t turn around and start heading back I’m not going to be able to walk the next day due to back pain. Now I can go further and enjoy it more. Thanks for your comments Edith!

I could not agree more that mirrorless is here to stay and will only improve as more lenses are added to the mix.
I was a Nikon guy (digital) after switching from an Olympus OM-4 (film). Carrying the required load of big DSLR’s I moved to an Olympus OM-D E-M5. Photography is fun again-the results are equal to or better than my Nikons and the future looks bright.
Good luck and keep up the great work.

can’t wait to hear more from you, Anne. I got a Sony a7r and just love it… full frame 36MP in an almost PnS size… with good glass, this is hard to beat. looking forward to next month trip to Joshua Tree and Salton Sea

Hello Steven, I have narrowed my choices down to the Sony a7r as I’m a big fan of full frame sensors. I’m currently using a Nikon D4 and a D800E (which I will continue to use as the image quality is superb) but I am looking forward to something lighter and more “carry friendly”. Is the image quality in your opinion as good as advertised? I’m not really expecting D4 or 800 quality, but close would be nice ……. I have found that most of the time, there is no free lunch where camera equipment is concerned.

The biggest benefit for me is that I want to keep my Fuji XE-1 out either on my neck or shoulder. I barely notice it. With the Canon DSLR’s and big lenses, I mainly store them in the backpack until I decided to bring it out to shoot something.

I don’t really have that same problem because I cannot carry stuff on my back. I’ve had back surgery and I’m always sorry when I try to carry a backpack. I think women are designed to carry weight in the front. I find the front loaders easier to carry. With my DSLR I usually use a cotton carrier and then the camera is always ready instantly. But now with the mirrorless it’s even better! I use the black rapid strap and don’t even notice it! Thanks for your comments Richard.

I am not sure what “woes” we have now? DSLR weight? I wouldn’t mind a lighter camera at all, but I don’t want a smaller one really. The smaller form DSLRs around now don’t fit in my hand nearly as nicely as the 7D or larger models.

Yes, it’s definitely the weight!! Don’t forget with the mirrorless, all the lenses weigh less too. You’re probably a big strong guy 🙂 so maybe it doesn’t affect you as much, but once you injure your back the weight makes a huge difference. I can only carry 20 pounds maximum and if I’m going hiking very far I can’t carry that much. So this is a huge difference for me. Maybe I can have more than 3 lenses now!!

Although I have to say the size does take some getting used to. The bigger camera does fit in my hand better (I have big hands) so it’s kind of odd when you have a camera you could carry in two fingers!

I purchased the NEX-6 a few months back, mainly for travel, but a funny thing happened: I found myself using it in preference to my Nikon D7100 nearly all the time. I went to Cannon Beach last week and shot with both. For sunsets I got equally good results. The D7100 does outshine the NEX-6 for birds in flight. Before I would often leave the D7100 behind for simple beach walks with my wife. The Sony now always goes into my pocket. For the sunset shots I put the Nikon on a tripod — too heavy to lug around much. The evening I used the Sony I was constantly on the move, reframing and looking for different angles, and was more able to nimbly avoid waves. I’m not ready to give up my really nice Nikon yet, but the Sony really wants to be my main camera these days.

I look forward to your review of the Sony NEX6, Anne. My concern with these cameras that they appear not to be easily pocketable – I can see myself having a range of three cameras: a pocketable compact, an in-between one and a hefty dSLR.

Well they could be pocketable if you stick to one of the smaller lenses. There is a 16mm pancake lens and with that you could put it in a coat pocket, but still not in a shirt pocket. But they are much more comfortable to use with a strap than a DSLR. When you put it over your shoulder it doesn’t weigh one side down and make your shoulder sore like the DSLR does. Thanks for your comments Andy.

Hi Kasun, I wouldn’t worry about the sensor being exposed to light. It really isn’t exposed all the time, you just keep your lens cap on when you’re not using it, or it’s in your bag. Besides camera technology changes so fast these days that even if it only lasts 5 years that is probably enough! I would suggest going mirrorless because the other factors like the weight and size make a bigger difference. I hope that helps!

Hello there Lumix team! I hope you’re not disappointed to find out that I didn’t consider the ones with the smaller sensor size. It’s hard to sort through so many options and I think sensor size is an important factor. I would love to hear if you think the Lumix has other features that make up for the sensor size.

No worries – we just wanted to precise one thing: the differences in micro for thirds sensors, MFT v’s APSC is small.

An APSC sensor is 1.6 times bigger than a MFT sensor. Older models of Lumix G suffered low light performance and sharpness but current models (G6, GF6, GX7, GM1, GH3, etc) all compete very well and exceed APSC size sensor light performance and resolution. So the gap is small!

When light hits the APSC sensor, it hits the sensor at an angle as the sensor is larger than the lens mount. This can create chromatic abboration.
The MFT sensor light hits the sensor directly reducing this effect. This is due to the size of the sensor being small enough to fit the lens mount size. SEE below

If you then compare these sensors to full frame or 35mm cameras the difference is almost double. Better low light, more pixels etc but the full frame cameras cost 3 to 5 times more than a MFT.

Hope this is clear for you and not too techie – we’re here to help if you have any questions!

I have had an Olympus OMD-E-1 since just before Christmas ( a gift to myself!) and love it. I have had 2 other digital Olympus’ so I had several 4/3 lenses, which with an adapter, I can use with this camera. I also bought a micro 4/3 lens and all of the lenses work great. Even my wife notices the difference in the pictures that I take with this camera. I took night pictures of Washington, DC without a tripod! The Oly anti vibration works super. At least 3 stops! Noise is kept at a minimum and I could go on and on. It is a great camera.

I had the Sony NEX 5N first then bought the NEX 7 and now have the a7. I have loved all these Sony cameras. I especially like the a7. But the light weight cameras from Sony are a pleaser to carry around, you don’t feel like you are dragging an anchor like some of the SLR. There is a big Wow factor in the photos you can obtain from these cameras. I won’t go back to Canon.

I am looking forward to your article on the Sony NEX6 as I also bought one late last year, to complement my Nikon D800 and D700 bodies.

I take many portraits using bounce flash on manual exposure mode either with TTL or manual flash. A problem I have when using the NEX6 in this manner is that the viewfinder goes black because it thinks the image will be under exposed because it doesn’t recognize that the flash will contribute the bulk of the light. An example exposure might be in the order of 1/125 at f/5.6 at ISO 200 and flash power to suit.

I also bought an adapter to attach various Nikon lenses to the NEX. This allows me to resurrect my 105mm f/2.5 from 1964 and use it once again.

Hi Brian, I hope you found my review. I don’t use flash, but I am surprised that the viewfinder goes black. Is it the viewfinder or the LCD screen? It seems odd. Dark I can understand but black doesn’t seem right. You might want to do some research on that. Thanks for your visit and comments!

Thank you Anne for sharing your experience with this fine wee camera -and for your review. I suspect Brian Thomson’s problem with using external flash is that he has “Live View Display, Setting Effect “ON” ” in the Setup Menu.
I made that mistake when first using an Alpha 65 so realised the source of the problem (and solution) in the Nex series.
My next mistake was forgetting to revert to the “ON” setting when out of studio mode! Wish the Nex6 and A65 had Memory settings to make up for my own lack of them!

Looking forward to your review of the NEX6. The first NEX5 came out just when I was looking for a new camera so I bought it. I was looking for something smaller than the DSLR and even though it looked a bit odd with the 18-55mm lens I went for it, and I liked it. I also bought the first Sony 18-200 mm lens for it. After two years I was ready for an upgrade and having seen the reviews of the NEX6 and my experience with the 5 made it an easy choice. Now I have a big lens with a small camera attached. Love it.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

I’m Anne. This is my new life.

I traded in a traditional career for a new life as an outdoor photographer and writer. I live in an RV and travel around North America photographing beautiful places. I write about travel, photography, and how changing your life is not as scary as it seems. Read More…

Popular Topics

Donate

Want to donate to Anne's fuel fund? Click on the pump below to donate via PayPal.

Wondering why the fuel pump is green?
It's because RVers use fewer resources and have a smaller carbon footprint than homeowners. We use less fuel than typical homeowners who commute to work and use planes for vacation. We use propane to heat our 200 square feet. We conserve water due to the size of our holding tanks and we use solar power to charge our batteries.